Ok, I'll explain. Cargo matters if you are doing BGS or PP. Not the cargo to be picked up, but the cargo that needs to be destroyed.
A Simple Solution to Combat Logging
- Thread starter Mimix
- Start date
Which is not the same thing as saying the cargo would remain there after the destruction of the ship.
Is my English really that bad or is it hard to understand for some other reason? If you are a pirate and the interdicted CMDR clogs, you won't be able to lay your hands on their cargo, will you?
Calling people names over a game is a bit pathetic. It’s also kind of ironic as it presents you as the exact thing your accusing the other guy of being.
And you probably thought things had changed here, alas no, same old same old
Well, you know.... we can always HOPE. When that fails... there's always the whole "If you want peace, prepare for war." stance.
And I thought we were all getting past the whole rude namecalling phase here and perhaps had someone who was willing to discuss matters on a logical level. It appears it's just yet another person who thinks pure assertion without proof is acceptable enough and chooses to rabble rouse the pitchforks.
I’m particularly enjoying your whinging about people who won’t play with you.
How's that? I'm not "namecalling", but I'm definitely calling out the fallacy presented here with some rather direct questions that have yet to be answered.
Please, do quote where I started "namecalling" in this conversation... I merely paraphrased what was previously mentioned with the word "gankers", which is what @galahad2069 had previously mentioned in a divisive statement when they mentioned "carebears", no?
Ad Hominem. No surprises there either
Wouldn't that be a carelessbear?
I do not differentiate. why do I have to? accidents happen. when talking about combat logging we're talking about intentional actions and not accidents.
my question is to you: what is so goddamn hard to understand about this?
Ah, sorry, but I have to stick up for the PvP community here. CP is not representative nor illustrative of the excellent Elite Dangerous PvP community.
That however is spot on. But we are of course enlightened people who can see through stereotypes and cliches
And so how do you determine whether or not it's intentional? There's really no need to swear here. Just answer the question... or is that too hard for you to understand?
I agree and do apologise to the PvP community at large but currently there is only one PvP voice being heard.Ah, sorry, but I have to stick up for the PvP community here. CP is not representative nor illustrative of the excellent Elite Dangerous PvP community.
That however is spot on. But we are of course enlightened people who can see through stereotypes and cliches
Told you we were enlightened people, who recognise when they spoke too soon and apologize for their hasty words..
Can you feel the smugness? I can. Feels nice
One of our squad-members was accused to be a c-logger. Why? He went to Golconda...in open...as he saw some gank...uhm...pvp'ers locking on on him, he MENU-LOGGED!!! After that he cooled down for 5 Minutes logged in again and instantly MENU-LOGGED again, as he witnessed the same "pvp'ers". Shortly after that, he received a "friendly" mail from Frontier, wherein the accusation of c-logging was stated. He replied, that we would like to take a glance at the log-protocol, that proofes he c-logged. Guess what again...no more consequences.
So much for carebears and gankers...oh...and by the way...the mentioned squad-member is a pretty good (in both meanings of the wording "good") pvp'er.
So...what are we talking about? Guilty till proofed otherwise?
So much for carebears and gankers...oh...and by the way...the mentioned squad-member is a pretty good (in both meanings of the wording "good") pvp'er.
So...what are we talking about? Guilty till proofed otherwise?
Hey, the thread is growing shorter.
I smell a mod
edit: a nice smelling mod. Don't hurt me!
I smell a mod
edit: a nice smelling mod. Don't hurt me!
Yet once more, accusations without proof that are mere assumption. I'm glad things worked out for your squad-member.
Torches and pitchforks being called for here would affect everyone negatively- as there's no way to differentiate the difference between a "c-log" versus a legitimate disconnect outside of the person in question openly (pun intended) admitting to the fact publicly.
Therefore... there is no "problem" that needs a solution here... if the accuser can prove that someone is "combat logging" by their own admission, then the penalties should apply.
Exactly that. The problem lies on Frontier's half of the playground. My mentioned incident, "proofes", that even Frontier cannot precisly differ between an intended c-log, connection-loss or a menu-log. Otherwise my mate wouldn't been contacted by Frontier. To conclude: Until Elite is not fully reworked, there won't be any chance to sanction c-log properly.Yet once more, accusations without proof that are mere assumption. I'm glad things worked out for your squad-member.
Torches and pitchforks being called for here would affect everyone negatively- as there's no way to differentiate the difference between a "c-log" versus a legitimate disconnect outside of the person in question openly (pun intended) admitting to the fact publicly.
Therefore... there is no "problem" that needs a solution here... if the accuser can prove that someone is "combat logging" by their own admission, then the penalties should apply.
Well, I somewhat agree... the onus still belongs to the accuser- yet the proof needs to be verified by Frontier. What I've seen a lot of is accusation without proof- and yet no way to actually determine legitimate disconnections versus intentional disconnections. IIRC, there's also a way for accusers to physically see in game (some sort of "ghosting" affect) between a "menu log" versus a "hardware" (or disconnect), so if someone is randomly accusing people of "combat logging" when it's not substantially proven as such, it should also be turned on the accuser, as well.
The Boy Who Cried "Wolf" comes to mind here.
Remember what appears to be Combat Logging to one person is low waking to someone else! Yes ages ago I was accused of menu logging when I low waked out of a situation. Apparently I was suppose to stay there and get blown up but by evading I was effectively cheating. Luckily that was not a fair representation of the PvP community, more an isolated case of stupids
Oh one more thing, how broke this game is, regarding PvP is. We (A Wing) chased a corvette, pinned her and open fire. The Vette deployed a fighter an instantly the vette rubberbanded like hell. Nevertheless we somehow manage to fire. suddenly the vette "dissapeared". We were NOT sure if he c-logged or it's the games fault. No wake no nothing. Luckily for us, and with full respect for the vette's commander he "reappered" and let us finish our job. No flaming on comms, just a "gg". Clearly an unintentioned c-log. Sure we could have blamed him for c-logging right after he "went" and we would had "proof" (video), but we are "good" pvp'ers.
@M00ka Now we meet at the dark side (regarding the other thread).
Simplystyc
Banned
For many a PvPer it's the fact that the other party cheated in order to escape an unwanted situation.
Thing is too, this applies not only to ganking, but legitimate PvP as well.
I personally feel, as I read through the comments here, that the whole stigma surrounding PvP needs to be thrown out the window. How most PvPers are grouped together with Gankers and how actual PvP in game is just ganking at that is that. Which is simply not the case.
Elite Dangerous is a multiplayer game and encourages PvP. How else would you explain all the multiplayer content such as : Fleet Carriers (Coming Soon), Multicrew, Wing Missions, BGS, Player Squadrons, etc. So many people say Elite is a single player game with multiplayer elements which is simply not the case